Pages

Thursday, December 3, 2015

Loss of Intellectual Integrity

It’s that time of the year again, when charitable organizations and the like solicit for financial support.That includes the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry.I am more than inclined to send them a big check similar to what my wife sends to her church, but no matter how much I support the mission of the organization, I am forced to decline.

Likewise articles in their magazine and related publications, such as eSkeptic, unintentionally reinforce that decision, when I find I am weakening in my resolve.My problem is the hypocrisy I find in the position these organizations have taken on Climate Change and the continued highly biased and one-sided opinion pieces that both the Committee and the Skeptic Organization publish.

Many people with a sincere interest in the
facts associated with Climate Change search for the opportunity for a credible debate on this topic.These organizations could provide the platform, if their official positions were not so blatantly one-sided.This is not the same as the oft voiced comment by Creationist to “teach the controversy,” where it is an argument of faith verses evidence. Both sides of the Climate Debate have credible and distinguished scientists.

To make matters even worse there has been a movement within these organizations to discredit those that challenge some of the extreme positions of global warming from being referred to as Climate Skeptics, as if these organizations had ownership of that identification.

Recognize your assumptions. Question them regularly. Don’t fall prey to mirror-imaging and related mindsets. Avoid cherry-picking to support your preferred hypothesis. Value evidence over belief. Skeptics in diverse fields ranging from the hard sciences to intelligence analysis know these maxims well. But plenty of research has made it clear that only exceptional effort keeps us all from falling prey to the same troublesome mental traits; it’s just plain hard to move beyond mere recognition of critical thinking best practices to actually practicing them best.

The article goes on to discuss experiences in the Catholic Church for the establishment of sainthood.

The book starts by describing the roots of the red team concept in the Roman Catholic Church’s “Devil’s Advocacy” method for vetting the qualifications of potential saints. . . It was thought, would ensure that objectivity served as a brake on rapid rushes to sainthood. . . But it raises the question: Why didn’t the process of challenging superstitions lead to the debunking of all attempts at sainthood?

This mild brake on the system for “confirming” miracles eventually proved too annoying for the faithful. . . .Pope John Paul II in 1983 got rid of the position altogether . . . beatifications and canonizations skyrocketed.

And here is the key sentence summarizing the result of this failure to challenge

Committee For Skeptical Inquiry

"I was dismayed by the rising tide of belief in the paranormal and lack of adequate scientific examination of these claims... Books such as ... the 'Chariots of the Gods ... 'Worlds in Collision'... 'The Bermuda Triangle' were widely popular... I was distressed that my students confused astrology with astronomy...without the benefit of scientific critique. Most of my scientific colleagues were equally perplexed by what was happening,..."

Paul Kurtz, founder

What is Skepticism

What is Science

Science is that discipline that validates observations and proposes explanations base on the Scientific Method:- Formulate the Question- Propose a Falsifiable Hypothesis- Predict based on the Hypothesis- Test the Predictions- Validate the results as Repeatable- Submit Honestly for Peer Review

However,

A little learning is a dangerous thing;Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring.- Alexander Pope, 1709

Science never claims dogma and never says, "the debate is over." It requires a never-ending refinement of hypotheses based on continuous improvement of tests and insight.

Test for Scientific Worthiness

Micheal Shermer is the author of Why People Believe Weird Things and How We Believeand is Editor-in-Chief of Skeptic magazine. He often makes personal appearances on TV shows that wish to present a balance perspective relative to claims of the paranormal or fringes of belief systems. He has offered ten tests to determine the scientific worthiness of any claim. Click here for our summary of those tests.

The above Widget is maintained by WhatsUpWithThat.com. They have posted no explanation as to why it is stalled in 2014. They are also aware of the misspelling of Monthly.